Literature DB >> 20230913

Automated matching software for clinical trials eligibility: measuring efficiency and flexibility.

Lynne Penberthy1, Richard Brown, Federico Puma, Bassam Dahman.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials (CT) serve as the media that translates clinical research into standards of care. Low or slow recruitment leads to delays in delivery of new therapies to the public. Determination of eligibility in all patients is one of the most important factors to assure unbiased results from the clinical trials process and represents the first step in addressing the issue of under representation and equal access to clinical trials.
METHODS: This is a pilot project evaluating the efficiency, flexibility, and generalizibility of an automated clinical trials eligibility screening tool across 5 different clinical trials and clinical trial scenarios.
RESULTS: There was a substantial total savings during the study period in research staff time spent in evaluating patients for eligibility ranging from 165h to 1329h. There was a marked enhancement in efficiency with the automated system for all but one study in the pilot. The ratio of mean staff time required per eligible patient identified ranged from 0.8 to 19.4 for the manual versus the automated process.
CONCLUSION: The results of this study demonstrate that automation offers an opportunity to reduce the burden of the manual processes required for CT eligibility screening and to assure that all patients have an opportunity to be evaluated for participation in clinical trials as appropriate. The automated process greatly reduces the time spent on eligibility screening compared with the traditional manual process by effectively transferring the load of the eligibility assessment process to the computer. Copyright (c) 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20230913      PMCID: PMC4387843          DOI: 10.1016/j.cct.2010.03.005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials        ISSN: 1551-7144            Impact factor:   2.226


  36 in total

1.  The design of a pre-encounter clinical trial screening tool: ASAP.

Authors:  Jing Ding; Selnur Erdal; Tara Borlawsky; Jianhua Liu; Deanna Golden-Kreutz; Jyoti Kamal; Philip R O Payne
Journal:  AMIA Annu Symp Proc       Date:  2008-11-06

2.  Evaluating an NLP-based approach to modeling computable clinical trial eligibility criteria.

Authors:  Tara Borlawsky; Philip R O Payne
Journal:  AMIA Annu Symp Proc       Date:  2007-10-11

3.  Electronic clinical trial protocol distribution via the World-Wide Web: a prototype for reducing costs and errors, improving accrual, and saving trees.

Authors:  L B Afrin; V Kuppuswamy; B Slater; R K Stuart
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  1997 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 4.497

4.  Ability of Medicare claims data and cancer registries to identify cancer cases and treatment.

Authors:  D K McClish; L Penberthy; M Whittemore; C Newschaffer; D Woolard; C E Desch; S Retchin
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  1997-02-01       Impact factor: 4.897

5.  Finding appropriate clinical trials: evaluating encoded eligibility criteria with incomplete data.

Authors:  N Ash; O Ogunyemi; Q Zeng; L Ohno-Machado
Journal:  Proc AMIA Symp       Date:  2001

6.  Lessons learned from enrollment in the BEST study--a multicenter, randomized trial of group psychosocial support in metastatic breast cancer.

Authors:  P J Goodwin; M Leszcz; G Quirt; J Koopmans; A Arnold; E Dohan; M Hundleby; H M Chochinov; M Navarro
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2000-01       Impact factor: 6.437

7.  A clinical recruiting management system for complex multi-site clinical trials using qualification decision support systems.

Authors:  Massoud Vahabzadeh; Jia-Ling Lin; Mustapha Mezghanni; Carlo Contoreggi; Michelle Leff
Journal:  AMIA Annu Symp Proc       Date:  2007-10-11

8.  Participation in cancer clinical trials: race-, sex-, and age-based disparities.

Authors:  Vivek H Murthy; Harlan M Krumholz; Cary P Gross
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2004-06-09       Impact factor: 56.272

9.  Generalizability of clinical trial results for major depression to community samples: results from the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions.

Authors:  Carlos Blanco; Mark Olfson; Renee D Goodwin; Elizabeth Ogburn; Michael R Liebowitz; Edward V Nunes; Deborah S Hasin
Journal:  J Clin Psychiatry       Date:  2008-08       Impact factor: 4.384

10.  What influences recruitment to randomised controlled trials? A review of trials funded by two UK funding agencies.

Authors:  Alison M McDonald; Rosemary C Knight; Marion K Campbell; Vikki A Entwistle; Adrian M Grant; Jonathan A Cook; Diana R Elbourne; David Francis; Jo Garcia; Ian Roberts; Claire Snowdon
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2006-04-07       Impact factor: 2.279

View more
  38 in total

1.  The design and implementation of an open-source, data-driven cohort recruitment system: the Duke Integrated Subject Cohort and Enrollment Research Network (DISCERN).

Authors:  Jeffrey M Ferranti; William Gilbert; Jonathan McCall; Howard Shang; Tanya Barros; Monica M Horvath
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2011-09-23       Impact factor: 4.497

2.  Computable Eligibility Criteria through Ontology-driven Data Access: A Case Study of Hepatitis C Virus Trials.

Authors:  Hansi Zhang; Zhe He; Xing He; Yi Guo; David R Nelson; François Modave; Yonghui Wu; William Hogan; Mattia Prosperi; Jiang Bian
Journal:  AMIA Annu Symp Proc       Date:  2018-12-05

3.  Cohort selection for clinical trials using hierarchical neural network.

Authors:  Ying Xiong; Xue Shi; Shuai Chen; Dehuan Jiang; Buzhou Tang; Xiaolong Wang; Qingcai Chen; Jun Yan
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2019-11-01       Impact factor: 4.497

4.  Hybrid bag of approaches to characterize selection criteria for cohort identification.

Authors:  V G Vinod Vydiswaran; Asher Strayhorn; Xinyan Zhao; Phil Robinson; Mahesh Agarwal; Erin Bagazinski; Madia Essiet; Bradley E Iott; Hyeon Joo; PingJui Ko; Dahee Lee; Jin Xiu Lu; Jinghui Liu; Adharsh Murali; Koki Sasagawa; Tianshi Wang; Nalingna Yuan
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2019-11-01       Impact factor: 4.497

5.  Textual inference for eligibility criteria resolution in clinical trials.

Authors:  Chaitanya Shivade; Courtney Hebert; Marcelo Lopetegui; Marie-Catherine de Marneffe; Eric Fosler-Lussier; Albert M Lai
Journal:  J Biomed Inform       Date:  2015-09-14       Impact factor: 6.317

6.  Text Mining of the Electronic Health Record: An Information Extraction Approach for Automated Identification and Subphenotyping of HFpEF Patients for Clinical Trials.

Authors:  Siddhartha R Jonnalagadda; Abhishek K Adupa; Ravi P Garg; Jessica Corona-Cox; Sanjiv J Shah
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Transl Res       Date:  2017-06-05       Impact factor: 4.132

7.  Barriers to therapeutic clinical trials enrollment: differences between African-American and white cancer patients identified at the time of eligibility assessment.

Authors:  Lynne Penberthy; Richard Brown; Maureen Wilson-Genderson; Bassam Dahman; Gordon Ginder; Laura A Siminoff
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2012-10-02       Impact factor: 2.486

8.  Effort required in eligibility screening for clinical trials.

Authors:  Lynne T Penberthy; Bassam A Dahman; Valentina I Petkov; Jonathan P DeShazo
Journal:  J Oncol Pract       Date:  2012-09-11       Impact factor: 3.840

9.  Automated determination of metastases in unstructured radiology reports for eligibility screening in oncology clinical trials.

Authors:  Valentina I Petkov; Lynne T Penberthy; Bassam A Dahman; Andrew Poklepovic; Chris W Gillam; James H McDermott
Journal:  Exp Biol Med (Maywood)       Date:  2013-10-09

10.  Feasibility of feature-based indexing, clustering, and search of clinical trials. A case study of breast cancer trials from ClinicalTrials.gov.

Authors:  M R Boland; R Miotto; J Gao; C Weng
Journal:  Methods Inf Med       Date:  2013-05-13       Impact factor: 2.176

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.